1

Eric Clapp

CYF 4580

Dr. Root

December 13, 2010

The Eschatology of Slacktivism

Over the course of the last few years, with the accelerated rise of

social networking, a modified form of social activism has taken shape

in the lives of many who use these websites. Social networking giants

such as Facebook and Twitter, and their millions of adolescent users,

have been overcome by what sociologists are calling “slacktivism”. The

term is derived from the two words “slacker” and “activism”. It has

most widely been defined as “feel-good online activism that has zero

political or social impact.”1 This is becoming a wildly popular, in some

cases even viral, way to promote certain causes, even if no more

action than promotion is taken. This is where much of the criticism

comes in. And this is where our concern as leaders in the church

should also protest. Because we are a church that believes in the

human participation with God in God’s mission for the world, the

ramifications of this slacktivist mindset can be quite severe.

As church leaders, we need to be aware of what these kinds of

actions are doing to our collective role as participants in the ministry of

God. While there are many worthwhile ventures and means of

1
Morozov, Evgeny. “The Brave New World of Slacktivism”.
 2

positively impacting the world, slacktivism promotes awareness

without agency. And in doing so, create a hopeless eschatological

outlook for young people as they mature. Along with this, we will see

that slacktivism is ultimately an attempt by youth to fix the problems

they see with the means they have. They see suffering in this world,

but often feel hopeless by their social location so they resort to

shallow, relatively ineffective means as a way of satisfying that need.

By thoroughly looking at this relatively new phenomenon, we will come

to a greater understanding of these slacktivist actions as a means of

agency for young people that ultimately fail the causes they wish to

help.

Empirical Task (What is going on?)

The advancement of the internet and technological

breakthroughs therein have lead this new generation of adolescents

into a peculiar place in world history. Never before have social

interactions become so accessible. However, the online character of

social interaction has forever changed how the majority of adolescents

relate to each other and the world. Impersonal interactions have given

way to a form of passive activism that has since found its way into

sociological discourse. There are thousands of links throughout the

Facebook/Twitter world that connect people to different causes and

websites where they can actually contribute some form of capital,

monetarily or otherwise. However the majority of people simply join

 3

the group, “like” the status, re-tweet the text so that their followers

may read it. Often times, this is as far as it will go. Nothing else will

come about in the form of physical or even verbal protest and the

person will go about their day. This kind of activism is a far cry from

the sit-ins, protests and other various activities that defined earlier

generations of Americans. However this inaction extends further than

the World Wide Web. It has started to infiltrate the church. And will

continue to negatively impact what youth remain in our pews if we do

not seriously alter the course.

When action is replaced by inaction, or at the very least

passivity, there are a number of things that begin to suffer. When we

look at this from a church perspective, the results are all the more

troubling. It comes as no shock to say that fundraising among most

Christian denominations is down as the economy is in a depression,

jobs are being cut, and people just simply are not going to church as

often as they used to. Yet still there are links on Facebook that you can

“like” that say things like “Let’s see how many true Christians are on

Facebook! Press ‘Like’ if Jesus if your Savior!!” By liking this certain

link, people get an affirmation of their religious devotion without

having to go to church, participate in a Bible study, or write any kind of

check to a congregation. At a psychological level, not only do these

people get an affirmation, in and of themselves, in this action, but

other people see their religious devotion as well. With this

 4

externalization of devotion, acts of faith are poised to become

exponentially shallower the further into this technological age we

progress without taking a serious look at our theology surrounding

mission and what ministry will look like without a change in course.

One of the main problems with the slacktivist view of mission is

that it is in many ways a cause-and-effect view of problem solving.

There are programs on social media websites called applications, one

of which is named ‘causes’. Each cause on the list is some kind of

humanitarian organization or effort that wishes to promote awareness

of a certain cause. Once the cause is ‘liked’ that is often the height of

action taken. If a young person is feeling particularly moved, they may

donate money to a cause but, for young people, awareness is often as

far as this will go.

This is cause and effect mission. There are problems identified in

the world that promote a need for action, and simple actions that

involve no real sacrifice of capital are exerted as the effect. This

hinders the possibility for creative responses and instead seeks to

solve global crises by ourselves and from the comfort of our own

computer. It promotes an eschatology that is fundamentally hopeless,

because it closes off many realms of possibility. There is a fundamental

gap in the theology that seeks to answer big questions with small

answers. Subsequently, the mission that develops with this theology

seeks to solve big problems with little effect. As the church, we cannot
 5

underestimate the profound impact that this kind of disengaged

involvement in the world will have on the generations of people that

will be raised in a culture of social media.

The popularity of slacktivism is quite troubling because it gives

way to a close-ended eschatology that severs possibility in favor of

quick responses. The simplicity of cause and effect mission rarely looks

beyond the immediate situation that the consumer is presented with.

With every philanthropic e-mail, the young person can either forward

the e-mail or not. It is a very cut and dry situation that involves

immediate response with little to no responsibility for follow-up. This

develops false sense of mission because there is no imperative behind

the split-second decision. This depletes any hope for large-scale,

systemic change in favor of shallow platitudes to feign altruism and

often fails to generate any positive impact.

Interpretive Task (Why is it going on?)

Since the 1920s, the concept of the teenager has evolved into a

cultural force that influences how national corporations spend

hundreds of billions of dollars. In spite of all of this economic influence,

the only capital given to youth is social. They work within the social

structures of their communities (school, church, online etc.) as a

means of seeking identity2. It makes sense, then, that the main form of

activism for young people comes in the form of social interaction.

2
From In-Class Lecture. 10/11/2010.
 6

Activism that culminates merely in awareness is a clear product of a

generation with only social means and capital to use and consume. We

have been socialized to know that issues such as global poverty, wars

and other global epidemics cannot be solved with the click of a mouse,

yet we still sign the online petition, re-tweet a philanthropic message

or change our profile picture as our effect in reaction to those global

causes. The universal problems in the world (hunger, poverty, disease

etc.) are met with concrete actions in a way that limits the scope of the

response. When the universal goes to the concrete, mission becomes

suffocated and can only move forward to a closed-off horizon.

In the face of this radically increasing method of raising

awareness, the church has been silent. Technology is an ever-present

reality in the lives of kids. And yet with almost every confirmation

lesson, retreat or any other program directed at youth, we yell at kids

when we sense that they have brought along an iPod or cell phone.

Since it is through technological means that they feel they are really

able to make a difference in the world, when the church takes these

things away, a significant gap appears between youth’s perception of

church and their tangible concept of making a difference in the world.

That is very bad news for the church.

Normative Task (What ought to be happening?)

For a wider look at what a hopeful eschatology contributes to the

life of a teenager, we turn to the work of German theologian Jurgen

 7

Moltmann. It could be said that universal, eschatological hope is the

central theme that runs throughout Moltmann’s writings. It may seem

tedious to look for a way to be missional with the social network

generation in Moltmann. However there are some clear cut lines drawn

within Moltmann’s theological framework that help lead to a fuller

understanding of eschatological mission in the lives of youth.

These kinds of shallow, quick-response methods of slacktivism

often correspond with some of the deepest suffering in the world. Here

we find a centerpiece of Moltmann’s theology: suffering and hope are

two sides of the same coin. Moltmann calls us to look beyond the

actual events at hand in order to find the inbreaking of God’s promise.

If we use one-click solutions to some of the world’s biggest problems,

we fail to see beyond the action itself and into the future and hope that

God is calling us into.

Another key point that Moltmann tackles in his theology is that

the future and hope are thought of as open-ended categories that are

centered in hope. This is a universal category. By simply existing in the

world, we are involved in the hope of the open-ended future of

possibility. It is no longer just an epistemological category. It is no

longer if you believe this, act in this way. Because you exist in the

world, you are involved in the hope that is centered in being. Therefore

hope in the open-ended future of God is an ontological category. We

have no choice but to exist in that reality. Therefore we have to take

 8

that seriously as a framework for the mission of the church.

In the previous section, the protest methods of slacktivism were

discussed as a way of giving universal problems concrete solutions.

The problem with this is that it limits the scope of the hopeful horizon

we look to as the future of God. Moltmann uses these terms to talk

about the cross. Moltmann says that in the cross, the unique, concrete

event of the cross and resurrection “becomes general through the

universal eschatological horizon in which it anticipates”3. Moltmann

continues by asserting that we must view all theology in a similar

fashion. We must see the Christ event as the concrete, which leads to

a future of unending possibility and hope. This must become the

framework for the way we do mission and ministry with youth if we

want to break out of the simple solutions that do not seek to foster

hopeful participation in the mission of God to the world.

Pragmatic Task (How should we act?)

A disclaimer is important at this point. The points that have been

made are largely in paradigmatic shifts and looking forward to an

ontological reality of open-ended hope of our involvement in the

ministry of God. In doing this, I realize that there are a lot of ideas that

are discussed without many concrete steps to be taken. I will outline

some suggestions, but we are dealing largely with hypothetical

situations and abstract ideas. This is problematic because it is the very

3
Moltmann Jurgen. Theology of Hope. Translated by Margaret Kohl, 3rd ed.
Fortress Press. Minneapolis, MN; 1993. Pg. 142
 9

thing that slacktivism deals with. It is abstract ideas and solutions with

shallow roots in actual change. That being said, I am fully aware that

full, systemic change is not going to come overnight. However I am

confident that paradigmatic shifts can begin to orient youth towards an

active mission and a hopeful future.

That being said, there are some small changes that can be

implemented to begin the work of re-framing slacktivist tendencies in a

way that orients it more toward positive change in the world. The first

thing that we must do as youth directors and people who work with

youth is to orient ourselves to a ministry of possibility. If there is one

theme that is consistent throughout the entire Biblical narrative, it is

that God gives life where there once was none. The inbreaking of God

is only possible when all other options have been deemed impossible.

If we follow this premise, then our ministry must involve an invitation

and an opportunity for youth to share their brokenness and suffering,

to share instances where they see suffering in the world so that they

have a place to work through their pain and suffering in the process of

growing up.

In the biblical narrative, barrenness and struggle end up leading

directly to hope and promise. We need to operate with Moltmann’s

category of cross and resurrection when we deal with kids. They are

two sides of the same coin. Because slacktivism grows out of an

unsettling feeling that things are not right with the world, it ties
 10

directly into our experience of suffering. However since kids do not

have capital, aside from social, they do not feel they can make an

impact in the world, which only leads to more impatience and

suffering. If the church became a place to embrace those feelings of

brokenness and becomes a place where kids can bring their

barrenness, then together we can assemble a theology of mission that

seeks the eschatological horizon of the open-ended future of God in a

way that takes seriously this suffering. In doing this, we are rendering

slacktivist tendencies futile and are instead inviting people into a

ministry centered in relationship between each other and God.